Off-label use of 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate is common despite little known benefit: A retrospective study

Long-Term Safety of a Four-Factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate (Kcentra®/Beriplex® P/N): An Updated Pharmacovigilance Review

INTRODUCTION

 Four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) is recommended for vitamin K antagonist reversal in patients with major bleeding or in need of surgery. The most important risk associated with the use of 4F-PCC is the occurrence of thromboembolic events (TEEs). In this review, we aim to evaluate the safety profile of a 4F-PCC (Kcentra®/Beriplex® P/N; CSL Behring, Marburg, Germany) by reviewing pharmacovigilance data.

METHODS

 A retrospective analysis of postmarketing pharmacovigilance data of Kcentra®/Beriplex® P/N from February 1996 to April 2022 was performed and complemented by a review of clinical studies published between January 2012 and April 2022.

RESULTS

 A total of 2,321,443 standard infusions of Kcentra®/Beriplex® P/N were administered during the evaluation period. Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were reported in 614 cases (∼1 per 3,781 standard infusions) and 233 of these cases (37.9%) experienced suspected TEEs related to 4F-PCC (∼1 per 9,963 standard infusions); most of these cases had pre-existing or concomitant conditions likely to be significant risk factors for thrombosis. TEE rates were similar when 4F-PCC was used on-label or off-label for direct oral anticoagulant-associated bleeding. Thirty-six cases (5.9%) reported hypersensitivity type reactions (∼1 per 64,485 standard infusions). No confirmed case of viral transmission related to 4F-PCC use was reported. The published literature also revealed a favorable safety profile of 4F-PCC.

CONCLUSION

 Analysis of postmarketing pharmacovigilance safety reports demonstrated that treatment with 4F-PCC was associated with few ADRs and a low rate of TEEs across multiple indications and settings, thus confirming a positive safety profile of 4F-PCC.

Utilization and safety of off-label prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) in a nonsurgical population

The aim of this study was to evaluate and describe the utilization and safety of 4F-PCC in a nonanticoagulated, nonsurgical patient population at an academic, tertiary care center. This retrospective, single-center chart review evaluated nonanticoagulated adult patients at least 18 years of age who had at least one dose of 4F-PCC administered between January 1, 2017, and September 30, 2022, for a nonsurgical indication. Hemostatic efficacy following 4F-PCC administration was the primary outcome, and secondary outcomes included an assessment of blood product administration, thrombotic events within 30 days post4F-PCC administration, in-hospital mortality, and the length of hospital stay. A total of 59 patients met the inclusion criteria, and 10 patients received 4F-PCC for coagulopathy associated with liver disease, 34 for intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), and 15 for other indications. For the primary outcome of hemostatic efficacy, 17 non-ICH patients (85%) had achieved hemostasis post-4F-PCC, and among the ICH patient population, 18 (64%) did not show expansion on repeat CT post4F-PCC, suggesting hemostasis. Blood product and hemostatic agent usage was frequent, with 72.9% of patients requiring products post-4F-PCC. Acute thromboembolic events occurred in six patients (10.2%), and in-hospital mortality occurred in 55.9% of patients. Off-label 4F-PCC use is common despite a lack of robust guidance for use. Following 4F-PCC administration, blood product use was frequent, the incidence of in-hospital mortality was high, and thromboembolic complications such deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE), and stroke were reported. Further studies are needed to validate the off-label administration of 4F-PCC in nonanticoagulated patients.

Andexanet alfa versus PCC products for factor Xa inhibitor bleeding: A systematic review with meta-analysis

Previous meta-analyses assessed andexanet alfa (AA) or prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) products for the treatment of Factor Xa inhibitor (FXaI)-associated major bleeding. However, they did not include recent studies or assess the impact of the risk of bias. We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis on the effectiveness of AA versus PCC products for FXaI-associated major bleeding, inclusive of the studies' risk of bias. PubMed and Embase were searched for comparative studies assessing major bleeding in patients using FXaI who received AA or PCC. We used the Methodological Index for NOn-Randomized Studies (MINORS) checklist and one question from the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal of Case Series tool to assess the risk of bias. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to provide a pooled estimate for the effect of AA versus PCC products on hemostatic efficacy, in-hospital mortality, 30-day mortality, and thrombotic events. Low-moderate risk of bias studies were meta-analyzed separately, as well as combined with high risk of bias studies. Eighteen comparative evaluations of AA versus PCC were identified. Twenty-eight percent of the studies (n = 5) had low-moderate risk and 72% (n = 13) had a high risk of bias. Studies with low-moderate risk of bias suggested improvements in hemostatic efficacy [Odds Ratio (OR) 2.72 (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.15-6.44); one study], lower in-hospital mortality [OR 0.48 (95% CI: 0.38-0.61); three studies], and reduced 30-day mortality [OR 0.49 (95% CI: 0.30-0.80); two studies] when AA was used versus PCC products. When studies were included regardless of the risk of bias, pooled effects showed improvements in hemostatic efficacy [OR 1.36 (95% CI: 1.01-1.84); 12 studies] and reductions in 30-day mortality [OR 0.53 (95% CI: 0.37-0.76); six studies] for AA versus PCC. The difference in thrombotic events with AA versus PCC was not statistically significant in the low-moderate, high, or combined risk of bias groups. The evidence from low-moderate quality real-world studies suggests that AA is superior to PCC in enhancing hemostatic efficacy and reducing in-hospital and 30-day mortality. When studies are assessed regardless of the risk of bias, the pooled hemostatic efficacy and 30-day mortality risk remain significantly better with AA versus PCC.

Ultra-Early Hemostatic Therapy for Acute Intracerebral Hemorrhage: An Updated Review

Intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) is the second most common type of stroke, accounting for approximately 10-20% of all strokes, and is linked to severe neurological disability and death. Since the most accurate predictor of outcome in patients with ICH is hematoma volume, there is a great need for pharmacologic therapy that can reduce hematoma expansion and resultant mass effect and edema. This is especially critical within the ultra-early window of 3-4 hours after the presentation. Hemostatic therapies are exceptionally important for those patients taking antiplatelet or anticoagulant medications to reverse the effects of these medications and therefore prevent hematoma expansion. Furthermore, the recent publication of the 2023 Guideline for the Management of Patients with Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage by the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association, the first update to the guidelines since 2012, underscores the importance of optimizing anticoagulation reversal for this population. The purpose of this selective, nonsystematic review is to examine current literature regarding the use of hemostatic therapies in ICH, with particular attention paid to antiplatelet, anticoagulation, and antifibrinolytic therapies.

Multicenter experience with andexanet alfa for refractory pericardial bleeding during catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation

INTRODUCTION

Pericardial bleeding is a rare but life-threatening complication of atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. Patients taking uninterrupted oral anticoagulation (AC) may be at increased risk for refractory bleeding despite pericardiocentesis and administration of protamine. In such cases, andexanet alfa can be given to reverse rivaroxaban or apixaban. In this study, we aim to describe the rate of acute hemostasis and thromboembolic complications with andexanet for refractory pericardial bleeding during AF ablation.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In this multicenter, case series, participating centers identified patients who received a dose of apixaban or rivaroxaban within 24 h of AF ablation, developed refractory pericardial bleeding during the procedure despite pericardiocentesis and administration of protamine and received andexanet. Eleven patients met inclusion criteria, with mean age of 73.5 ± 5.3 years and median CHA₂ DS₂ -VASc score 4 [3-5]. All patients received protamine and pericardiocentesis, and 9 (82%) received blood products. All patients received a bolus of andexanet followed, in all but one, by a 2-h infusion. Acute hemostasis was achieved in eight patients (73%) while three required emergent surgery. One patient (9%) experienced acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction after receiving andexanet. Therapeutic AC was restarted after a mean of 2.2 ± 1.9 days and oral AC was restarted after a mean of 2.9 ± 1.6 days, with no recurrent bleeding.

CONCLUSION

In patients on uninterrupted apixaban or rivaroxaban, who develop refractory pericardial bleeding during AF ablation, andexanet can achieve hemostasis thereby avoiding the need for emergent surgery. However, there is a risk of thromboembolism following administration.

Four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate use for on-label versus off-label indications: a retrospective cohort study

This study aimed to characterize the utilization of four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) at a tertiary academic medical center and evaluate the incidence of thromboembolic events (TEs) and mortality when used in an on-label versus off-label context. All medical records for consecutive patients having received 4F-PCC over 61-months were retrospectively evaluated. On-label indications for 4F-PCC were defined per FDA guidance, with the remaining indications considered off-label. Three hundred sixty-nine 4F-PCC doses were administered to 355 patients, with 46.6% of administrations classified as off-label. On-label and off-label groups demonstrated similar rates of TEs (16.2% vs. 14%). On-label patients receiving repeated administrations of 4F-PCC or with a post-administration INR ≤ 1.5 had a significantly higher incidence of TE. Off-label patients with a prior history of TE were more likely to develop a TE following 4F-PCC administration. Off-label patients also had a significantly higher 30-day mortality relative to on-label patients (29.1% versus 18.3%). In conclusion, in a large cohort of patients, observed rates of off-label 4F-PCC use were high. Underlying prothrombotic risk factors were predictive of TEs in off-label patients. Moreover, patients receiving off-label 4F-PCC demonstrated higher transfusion rates. Overall, our study findings suggest that the utilization of 4F-PCC in an off-label context may convey a significant risk to patients with uncertain clinical benefits.

Contemporary Perioperative Management of Direct Oral Anticoagulants

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have rapidly emerged as popular alternatives to warfarin in the setting of nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism, and secondary prevention of arterial thrombosis. It is now estimated that more patients in the United States take DOACs than warfarin for approved indications. Studies to date have shown that these drugs are similarly efficacious with perhaps a lower bleeding risk than warfarin. The purpose of this review is to provide insight into the currently available DOACs and discuss the management and reversal strategies for patients in the perioperative period.

On-label compared to off-label four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate use: a retrospective, observational study

BACKGROUND

Four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) is US Food and Drug Administration approved for the urgent reversal of coagulation factor deficiency induced by a vitamin K antagonist complicated by acute major bleeding or in situations in which invasive procedures are urgently needed. Although recent evidence suggests the superiority of 4F-PCC over plasma for on-label indications, the off-label use of 4F-PCC has not been rigorously studied.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Eighty-nine patients receiving 4F-PCC at a single institution from July 2016 to December 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. Two cohorts, "On-Label" and "Off-Label" uses of 4F-PCC, were evaluated, comparing patient characteristics, blood utilization, and clinical outcomes including in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

Patients receiving 4F-PCC for off-label reasons (n = 46) were younger and sicker compared to those receiving 4F-PCC for on-label reasons (n = 43). Notably, the mortality rate for off-label use was approximately twofold greater than the mortality rate for on-label use (26 of 46 [56.5%] vs. 12 of 43 [27.9%]; p = 0.006). Patients receiving 4F-PCC for off-label reasons received more units per patient of each blood component than their on-label counterparts. The average cost estimate per patient for 4F-PCC was similar (approx. $4300) in each cohort.

CONCLUSION

4F-PCC is an effective but expensive treatment option for those requiring urgent reversal of vitamin K antagonist-induced coagulopathy. However, providers should be conscious of the high costs and questionable efficacy when using 4F-PCC off-label.

Blood, blood components, plasma, and plasma products

This review of 2018 publications identifies side effects of blood, blood components, and plasma products. In addition, albumin, blood transfusion (erythrocytes, granulocytes, and platelets), blood substitutes (hemoglobin-based oxygen carriers), plasma products (alpha1-antitrypsin, C1 esterase inhibitor concentrate, cryoprecipitate, and fresh frozen plasma), plasma substitutes (etherified starches, and gelatin), globulins (intravenous immunoglobulin, subcutaneous immunoglobulin, and anti-D immunoglobulin), coagulation proteins (factor I, factor II, factor VIIa, factor VIII, factor IX, prothrombin complex concentrate, antithrombin III, and von Willebrand factor/factor VIII concentrates), erythropoietin and derivatives, thrombopoietin and receptor agonists, transmission of infectious agents through blood donation, and stem cells are reviewed. This chapter informs the reader about newly recognized and published data in the blood product domain.